Talk:California Bureau of Investigation
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Delete
[edit]This page should be deleted.
The real CBI no longer exists under that name. The link to ossh.com is not an official site, and contains a cached version of a site which no longer exists, as does the link at the Wayback Machine. Look at the copyright notice, it says 2001. Go to the home page of ossh.com. I see nowhere on the official BI site that it uses the CBI name, and you will also see that prior to February 17, 2012, the agency did not exist, so there is no continuity with the former CBI. The BI was formed from parts of different state agencies, including the BII, which itself was a merger between the old CBI and other agencies. --Nike (talk) 06:51, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
- No. While a case may be made for renaming this "Bureau of Investigation (California)" (though parenthetical disambiguators should be avoided if a more natural disambiguator) but there's no reason to delete a valid article on a real life law enforcement agency. If anything should be deleted (or merged) its the "fictional" article, as it is clearly a case of a fictional depiction of a real world agency. And I find the claim of no continuity to be ludicrous. Name changes as part of reorganizations aren't a break with continuity. oknazevad (talk) 02:14, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- You are responding to something written last year, and I do not recall what the status of the two articles was at that time, but it was never my intent to delete information about a real-life agency. I would support either renaming, or the separation of the article back into two. I won't quibble about continuity, in spite of the fact that the official web site contradicts this. Regardless, an article about the BI should have the actual name of the entity, not the name of a fictional one, nor of one which no longer exists. The common name is NOT "California Bureau of Investigation" (CBI), but is exclusively referred to as "Bureau of Investigation" or BI. --Nike (talk) 22:22, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
- Using "Bureau of Investigation" without "California" is only useful, and common in California. It means nothing to anyone outside of that area. Many states, provinces, and countries, have a "Bureau of Investigation". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Notwillywanka (talk • contribs) 16:30, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
- You are responding to something written last year, and I do not recall what the status of the two articles was at that time, but it was never my intent to delete information about a real-life agency. I would support either renaming, or the separation of the article back into two. I won't quibble about continuity, in spite of the fact that the official web site contradicts this. Regardless, an article about the BI should have the actual name of the entity, not the name of a fictional one, nor of one which no longer exists. The common name is NOT "California Bureau of Investigation" (CBI), but is exclusively referred to as "Bureau of Investigation" or BI. --Nike (talk) 22:22, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
CBI issue on CBI India
[edit]I am facing trouble from CBI India police Rakesh Asthana 2603:6011:B603:FD83:78E6:5319:5904:793F (talk) 00:16, 31 December 2022 (UTC)